If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Comment

UNIX Philosophy is not a bible. If you follow it like one then you are a zealot. You can solve any problem by following the UNIX philosophy, but that doesn't mean that the "UNIX Philosophy answer" is the BEST answer. Redhat and Lennart believe that systemd is the best solution for the problems they see. You want to disagree? Fine. Upstart is still being developed, same as OpenRC, so start being a contributor to either Ubuntu & Debian or Gentoo and then you can make sure things get done your way.

I use systemd everyday on my Arch Box-- its a desktop, VM host, home-server and media center. It is stable as can be aside from an issue thats come up in the last few days, which is a kernel issue, not a systemd problem. I say bring on systemd, bring on pulse, bring on networkmanager-- though NM needs bridging support ASAP to handle VM access.

Comment

UNIX Philosophy is not a bible. If you follow it like one then you are a zealot. You can solve any problem by following the UNIX philosophy, but that doesn't mean that the "UNIX Philosophy answer" is the BEST answer. Redhat and Lennart believe that systemd is the best solution for the problems they see. You want to disagree? Fine. Upstart is still being developed, same as OpenRC, so start being a contributor to either Ubuntu & Debian or Gentoo and then you can make sure things get done your way.

The article was about Upstart.

Of course the coinciding thread quickly got down to the business of criticizing the neanderthals at Canonical for not embracing The One True Way (TM) that is, of course, whatever is proposed by either Lennart and / or Red Hat, and in this specific case, systemd.

The threads here are so reliably predictable and they're always good for a chuckle.

Can't wait for the next NVIDIA driver update article... followed by the cries of "still no KMS... still no Wayland support... still no Optimus... still not open source". Over and over again.

Yes, we get it... Upstart is not systemd. We shouldn't expect Canonical to bring systemd into Ubuntu any earlier than they announce that they're going to do so. Right now, Upstart is their way... and frankly, it works pretty damn well.

(And I love the snobbery of some here that UNIX systems are somehow less competent solutions because they don't have the awesomeness that is systemd or whatever other Linux fad-of-the-day.)

Comment

UNIX Philosophy is not a bible. If you follow it like one then you are a zealot. You can solve any problem by following the UNIX philosophy, but that doesn't mean that the "UNIX Philosophy answer" is the BEST answer. Redhat and Lennart believe that systemd is the best solution for the problems they see. You want to disagree? Fine. Upstart is still being developed, same as OpenRC, so start being a contributor to either Ubuntu & Debian or Gentoo and then you can make sure things get done your way.

I use systemd everyday on my Arch Box-- its a desktop, VM host, home-server and media center. It is stable as can be aside from an issue thats come up in the last few days, which is a kernel issue, not a systemd problem. I say bring on systemd, bring on pulse, bring on networkmanager-- though NM needs bridging support ASAP to handle VM access.

I use sysvinit everyday on my Slackware desktop and it just works. I have no problems with OpenBSD init.

Comment

Unix philosophy is nothing but that - a philosophy, not holy writ handed down from god. It should certainly be considered when designing a new system, but it's not the only way to build good working software.

Comment

I doubt anyone here will listen to me, but what Canonical is doing in Ubuntu is actually better for system reliability. Developers capable of reviewing systemd on technical merits find that it makes Linux systems less reliable. I do not think that the systemd developers even attempt to dispute this. The issue is that the kernel will panic if PID 1 dies and systemd's design makes it very difficult to avoid failures in PID 1.